Page:Beowulf (Wyatt).djvu/92

This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.

68

BEOWULF.

ðonne forstes bend Fæder onlǣteð,

1610onwindeð wǣl-rāpas,^[1] sē geweald hafað
sǣla ond mǣla; þæt is sōð Metod.
Ne nōm hē in þǣm wicum, Weder-Gēata lēod,
māðm-ǣhta mā, þēh hē þǣr monige geseah,
būton þone hafelan ond þā hilt somod,
1615since fāge; sweord ǣr gemealt,
forbarn brōden mǣl; wæs þæt blōd *tō þæs hāt,⁠Fol. 165b.
ǣttren ellor-gǣst, sē þǣr inne swealt.
Sōna wæs on sunde, sē þe ǣr æt sæcce gebād
wīg-hryre wrāðra, wæter ūp þurhdēaf;
1620wǣron ȳð-gebland eal gefǣlsod,
ēacne eardas, þā se ellor-gāst
oflēt līf-dagas ond þās lǣnan gesceaft.
Cōm þā tō lande lid-manna helm
swīð-mōd swymman, sǣ-lāce gefeah,
1625mægen-byrþenne þāra þe hē him mid hæfde.
Eodon him þā tōgēanes Gode þancodon,
ðrȳðlīc þegna hēap, þēodnes gefēgon,

þæs þe hī hyne gesundne gesēon mōston.

↑ 1610. Sweet adopts Kemble’s emendation, wǣg-rāpas. Heyne has wæl-rāpas, and in his glossary: “cf. wæll, wel, wyll, Quelle, Flut;—leax sceal on wæle mid scēote scrīðan, Gnom. Cott. 39.” Sweet gives the same passage, in his “A.S. Reader” xxviii. 39, marked wǣle, and there is no doubt he is right (more’s the pity he departs from the MS. reading here). Heyne identifies wæl with well, “a well” (more common as a weak noun). It is clear that he has confounded two words. In the Wright-Wülcker Glossaries we find: “Fons, well, 178. 8; Gurges, wæl, 178. 13.” The vowel of the latter word is long, as shown by the common Lancashire weel, noted by Somner in 1659, and still in use; so also in all the cognate languages, e.g. in modern Plattdeutsch Weel, and Heyne himself, in the glossary to his Kleinere and. Denkmäler (1867) has: “uuāl (A.S. wǣl, gurges), Abgrund.”

This article is issued from Wikisource. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.

[1] 1610. Sweet adopts Kemble’s emendation, wǣg-rāpas. Heyne has wæl-rāpas, and in his glossary: “cf. wæll, wel, wyll, Quelle, Flut;—leax sceal on wæle mid scēote scrīðan, Gnom. Cott. 39.” Sweet gives the same passage, in his “A.S. Reader” xxviii. 39, marked wǣle, and there is no doubt he is right (more’s the pity he departs from the MS. reading here). Heyne identifies wæl with well, “a well” (more common as a weak noun). It is clear that he has confounded two words. In the Wright-Wülcker Glossaries we find: “Fons, well, 178. 8; Gurges, wæl, 178. 13.” The vowel of the latter word is long, as shown by the common Lancashire weel, noted by Somner in 1659, and still in use; so also in all the cognate languages, e.g. in modern Plattdeutsch Weel, and Heyne himself, in the glossary to his Kleinere and. Denkmäler (1867) has: “uuāl (A.S. wǣl, gurges), Abgrund.”